httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Kristian K. Nielsen" <>
Subject Re: Two small.... + Faq # 17
Date Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:23:11 GMT
Sorry never saw the PR#2366, also I did the patch last weekend and at that
point there wasn't any patches ;-)

Anyway...I've read your answer to FAQ question #17 ("How can I have my
script output parsed?........This is a feature The Apache Group gopes to add
in the next major release"):

Sorry, I'm new to this list and I was just wondering what the current state
on this manner is.
If nobody has started the preparation yet, I would like to help.

If not, which method does The Apache Group have in mind (first about
1. The server should rehandle all output from the script based on the
Content-Type, e.x. the script returns the old "text/x-server-parsed-html",
in the configuration file there should be two new Options, say:
    ScriptType text/html text/x-server-parsed-html
    ScriptHandler server-parsed text/x-server-parsed-html
2. Same as above but handled inside the script using either a speciel unique
Status-code or a new script header, e.x. Content-Handle.

How to implement it into the source
1. Both of above methods could be made rather easily (and messy) by
buffering the entire output from the script in either a large memory block
or a temporary file, simply by rewriting parts of mod_cgi and parts of the
2. A more throught method would be to rewrite the buffering system, so input
can be handled directly from mod_cgi to modules like mod_include.

Yes, I don't know much about what I'm taking about at this point, but I
will - doing next week I hope :-)


-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Gaudet <>
To: Kristian K. Nielsen <>
Cc: <>
Date: 10 June 1998 06:12
Subject: Re: Two small mistakes in the release of Apache 1.3

>We're talking about releasing 1.3.1 in a little over a week.  You can find
>the specific patch in PR#2366 at
>On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, Kristian K. Nielsen wrote:
>> >
>> >I nailed that one already... thanks for pointing it out though.  I
>> >the cookie format to actually include the FQDN... it seems silly to not
>> >use the FQDN... but maybe someone will explain why the unqualified name
>> >good.
>> >
>> Then when can we except the officiel patch to be released?
>> Kristian

View raw message